Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Cryptography Security
Experimentally attacking quantum money schemes based on quantum retrieval games
arXiv
Authors: Kateřina Jiráková, Karol Bartkiewicz, Antonín Černoch, Karel Lemr
Year
2018
Paper ID
23095
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
139
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The concept of quantum money (QM) was proposed by Wiesner in the 1970s. Its main advantage is that every attempt to copy QM unavoidably leads to imperfect counterfeits. In the Wiesner's protocol, quantum banknotes need to be delivered to the issuing bank for verification. Thus, QM requires quantum communication which range is limited by noise and losses. Recently, Bozzio et al. (2018) have demonstrated experimentally how to replace challenging quantum verification with a classical channel and a quantum retrieval game (QRG). This brings QM significantly closer to practical realisation, but still thorough analysis of the revised scheme QM is required before it can be considered secure. We address this problem by presenting a proof-of-concept attack on QRG-based QM schemes, where we show that even imperfect quantum cloning can, under some circumstances, provide enough information to break a QRG-based QM scheme.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Cryptography & Security research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2018 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The concept of quantum money (QM) was proposed by Wiesner in the 1970s.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.